Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

WTF-Beta

  1. Home
  2. Categories
  3. Off Key - General Discussion
  4. It passed in the Senate

It passed in the Senate

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Off Key - General Discussion
32 Posts 8 Posters 155 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • D Offline
    D Offline
    Daniel.
    wrote last edited by
    #13

    Copayments for Medicaid recipients.

    How absurd.

    1 Reply Last reply
    • AxtremusA Axtremus

      A new absurdity in the bill:

      https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/02/upshot/republicans-food-aid-alaska.html

      It goes like this:

      • the intent was originally was to make the states that have higher error rates when it comes to administering the food stamp programs pay more -- supposedly this is to encourage states to "have skin in the game" to lower error rates when administering the food stamp programs.
      • But to get Murkowski's vote, with Murkowski representing the state with the highest food stamp administration error rate, the Senate bill ended up adding a provision that exempts states whose food stamp error rates exceeding certain threshold from having to pay anything at all (at least for a while).
      • so if the Senate bill ended comes to pass, the states with high error rates will be exempt from paying for the food stamps (at least for a while), while states with low-enough food error rates will have to pay something.
      • in effect, this may end up incentivizing states to jack up their food stamp administration error rates (at least for a while) to avoid having to pay anything towards the their food stamp programs.

      The modern GOP really sucks at governing.

      S Offline
      S Offline
      Steve Miller
      wrote last edited by
      #14

      @Axtremus

      Random Internet sites inform me that the Murkowski provision was eliminated from the bill right after Murkowski voted. Not sure if if that’s possible.

      Have not been able to verify.

      1 Reply Last reply
      • wtgW Offline
        wtgW Offline
        wtg
        wrote last edited by wtg
        #15

        Inside Hakeem Jeffries' decision to filibuster Trump's big bill

        The overwhelming consensus on Capitol Hill was that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) would only delay President Trump's "big, beautiful bill" by about an hour. As noon approached on Thursday, that expectation was shattered.

        Why it matters: For months, the Democratic base has been demanding their party's leaders "fight harder" and use every tool at their disposal to stymie the GOP agenda. In the eyes of many lawmakers, this is Jeffries delivering.

        Jeffries blasted the GOP's marquee tax and spending bill as an "immoral document," vowing to "stand up and push back against it with everything we have on behalf of the American people."

        As of late Thursday morning, Jeffries was on track to surpass then-Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy's (R-Calif.) record-breaking, 8-and-a-half hour speech to delay the Build Back Better vote in 2021.

        If Jeffries keeps speaking until 1:23pm ET, he will have set a new record.

        https://www.axios.com/2025/07/03/hakeem-jeffries-speech-big-beautiful-bill-trump

        When the world wearies and society ceases to satisfy, there is always the garden - Minnie Aumônier

        1 Reply Last reply
        • wtgW Offline
          wtgW Offline
          wtg
          wrote last edited by
          #16

          The dueling House and Senate bills differ on details but agreed on a key point: Both would massively expand federal spending on immigration enforcement.

          Overall, the Senate version will dedicate $175 billion to an immigration crackdown, including an extra $30 billion for ICE, which can be spent over four years. To put that in perspective, ICE’s current budget is about $8 billion per year.

          The bill also designates $45 billion for detention facilities, which can also be spent at any time over the next four years. By comparison, the U.S. spends about $8 billion a year on the Bureau of Prisons.

          From The Intercept:

          https://archive.is/GQ2Hi

          When the world wearies and society ceases to satisfy, there is always the garden - Minnie Aumônier

          1 Reply Last reply
          • wtgW Offline
            wtgW Offline
            wtg
            wrote last edited by
            #17

            Who are the winners, and who are the losers. Bloomberg reporting.

            https://archive.is/6l7dB

            When the world wearies and society ceases to satisfy, there is always the garden - Minnie Aumônier

            1 Reply Last reply
            • B Offline
              B Offline
              Bernard
              wrote last edited by Bernard
              #18

              Murkowski doesn't give a *^&) about people in states other than her own. She admits the bill is bad but votes for it anyway in hopes that useless Mike will cover her (&&. Makes me want to barf. My opinion of her actions really isn't fit for printing.

              The industrial revolution cheapened everything.

              1 Reply Last reply
              • AxtremusA Offline
                AxtremusA Offline
                Axtremus
                wrote last edited by
                #19

                Is Murkowski worse than the other 49 GOP Senators who voted for the bill? Presumably these 49 GOP voted more enthusiastically for the bill compared to Murkowski.

                B 1 Reply Last reply
                • AxtremusA Axtremus

                  Is Murkowski worse than the other 49 GOP Senators who voted for the bill? Presumably these 49 GOP voted more enthusiastically for the bill compared to Murkowski.

                  B Offline
                  B Offline
                  Bernard
                  wrote last edited by Bernard
                  #20

                  @Axtremus

                  Presumably these 49 GOP voted more enthusiastically for the bill compared to Murkowski.

                  Well, that's what makes Collins and Murkowski so bad. They betray themselves. Collins, over and over again, makes sure we know how concerned she is, yet almost always fails to reach the conclusion that her logic should dictate. (She held her ground on this vote, good for her.) Murkowski flat out stated how bad the bill was and that she hoped shallow Mike would change it in the House. How f'n clueless can you be? These two excel at abdicating responsibility--responsibility that they spend a lot of time trying to convince us they have a handle on, when in fact it boils down to little more than a show because more often than not they don't have the spine to do the right thing. But we know they're concerned and they've thought about saving the day, but in the end, they cave.

                  The industrial revolution cheapened everything.

                  AxtremusA 1 Reply Last reply
                  • B Bernard

                    @Axtremus

                    Presumably these 49 GOP voted more enthusiastically for the bill compared to Murkowski.

                    Well, that's what makes Collins and Murkowski so bad. They betray themselves. Collins, over and over again, makes sure we know how concerned she is, yet almost always fails to reach the conclusion that her logic should dictate. (She held her ground on this vote, good for her.) Murkowski flat out stated how bad the bill was and that she hoped shallow Mike would change it in the House. How f'n clueless can you be? These two excel at abdicating responsibility--responsibility that they spend a lot of time trying to convince us they have a handle on, when in fact it boils down to little more than a show because more often than not they don't have the spine to do the right thing. But we know they're concerned and they've thought about saving the day, but in the end, they cave.

                    AxtremusA Offline
                    AxtremusA Offline
                    Axtremus
                    wrote last edited by
                    #21

                    @Bernard said in It passed in the Senate:

                    They betray themselves.

                    On that note:

                    https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/03/us/politics/republican-criticism-trump-policy-bill.html?unlocked_article_code=1.T08.PEVI.ql80hNTGogFG

                    The article rounds up the GOP legislators who publicly savaged the bill then voted for it anyway.

                    B 1 Reply Last reply
                    • AxtremusA Axtremus

                      @Bernard said in It passed in the Senate:

                      They betray themselves.

                      On that note:

                      https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/03/us/politics/republican-criticism-trump-policy-bill.html?unlocked_article_code=1.T08.PEVI.ql80hNTGogFG

                      The article rounds up the GOP legislators who publicly savaged the bill then voted for it anyway.

                      B Offline
                      B Offline
                      Bernard
                      wrote last edited by Bernard
                      #22

                      @Axtremus They're all bankrupt, of course. And it's absolutely sickening.

                      Representative Andy Harris of Maryland, the chairman of the Freedom Caucus, said that he and other conservative holdouts were swayed after discussions with Mr. Trump about “executive actions” and other steps he and his administration could take to change the way the law would be implemented.

                      That's an absolute travesty, but it does put those idiots in a different category from Murkowski. At least they think (ha!) the law will be implemented differently than what they voted on. Gawd, they're pathetic.

                      After accepting bribes, Murkowski hoped the bill would be changed in the House. And she frequently criticizes the President. Her convictions obviously don't go very deep. And, as the article points out, she held leverage. And she threw it away.

                      None of this should be construed to mean I hold the remainder of the Senate and House republicans in esteem. Hawley: spineless hypocrite, along with countless others.

                      Bottom line for me is that Collins and Murkowski often find themselves in positions of holding leverage, but instead of doing the right thing, they habitually disappoint.

                      The industrial revolution cheapened everything.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • B Offline
                        B Offline
                        Bernard
                        wrote last edited by
                        #23

                        More on the grotesqueness of it all: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/01/us/politics/murkowski-republican-bill.html

                        The industrial revolution cheapened everything.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • D Offline
                          D Offline
                          Daniel.
                          wrote last edited by Daniel.
                          #24

                          This process starting with Schumer having leverage and throwing it away.

                          I'm past the past the point of hoping the Democrats will have a spine.

                          This was the straw that broke the camel's back for me.

                          B 1 Reply Last reply
                          • D Daniel.

                            This process starting with Schumer having leverage and throwing it away.

                            I'm past the past the point of hoping the Democrats will have a spine.

                            This was the straw that broke the camel's back for me.

                            B Offline
                            B Offline
                            Bernard
                            wrote last edited by Bernard
                            #25

                            @Daniel. Well, there is that too. There is a lot of rot in settled politics. Too many long-termers at the top. I get a glimmer of hope from today's younger generation. I'm heartened by Mamdani's primary win in NYC over the Dem establishment and hope the party leadership wakes up.

                            The industrial revolution cheapened everything.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • D Offline
                              D Offline
                              Daniel.
                              wrote last edited by
                              #26

                              @Bernard Yes, I feel the same way, and am also encouraged by what happened in NYC.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              • D Offline
                                D Offline
                                Daniel.
                                wrote last edited by Daniel.
                                #27

                                ACA subsidices eliminated.

                                So, basically the ACA overturned.

                                'Big Beautiful Bill': Higher healthcare premiums for Obamacare https://share.google/5ARmA5e1XCQWER8c2

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                • wtgW Offline
                                  wtgW Offline
                                  wtg
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #28

                                  Trump’s Medicaid cuts are coming for rural Americans: ‘It’s going to have to hit them first’

                                  Experts worry the tax-and-spending bill will gut healthcare and hospitals, especially in states like North Carolina

                                  https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jul/04/rural-americans-medicaid-cuts-trump-bill

                                  When the world wearies and society ceases to satisfy, there is always the garden - Minnie Aumônier

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  • D Offline
                                    D Offline
                                    Daniel.
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #29

                                    The part I don't understand is why the protests have been negligible when the last time he was going to gut healthcare the protests were massive.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    • S Offline
                                      S Offline
                                      Steve Miller
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #30

                                      Because this time the folks affected are actually in favor of it.

                                      D 1 Reply Last reply
                                      • wtgW Offline
                                        wtgW Offline
                                        wtg
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #31

                                        Rural southwest Nebraska clinic closes, blaming expected Medicaid cuts

                                        https://www.klkntv.com/rural-southwest-nebraska-clinic-closes-blaming-expected-medicaid-cuts/

                                        When the world wearies and society ceases to satisfy, there is always the garden - Minnie Aumônier

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        • S Steve Miller

                                          Because this time the folks affected are actually in favor of it.

                                          D Offline
                                          D Offline
                                          Daniel.
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #32

                                          @Steve-Miller said in It passed in the Senate:

                                          Because this time the folks affected are actually in favor of it.

                                          Yes. I see now. You're right.

                                          How messed up.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          Powered by NodeBB | Contributors
                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups